4 ms·

Organic requires far more land, more water, more fertilizer and more energy than traditionaly farmed produce. In addition, the pesticed sprayed on crops do not

Organic requires far more land, more water, more fertilizer and more energy than traditionaly farmed produce. In addition, the pesticed sprayed on crops do not penetrate the skin, and can be removed easy by rinsing the produce with water. But organic crops contain endogenous pesticides that cannot be washed off. Organic crops have been selectively bread over many years to be pest resistant, so that they could be grown commercially by factory farming. They achieve this by producing more natural pesticides, which permeate through all parts of the fruit or veg and make organic produce far more toxic than than traditional food.

sjtindell 5y ago
I’m interested, can you share some source for this information?
- pvaldes 5y ago
  Is probably saying that plants accumulate deterring substances against plagues, but this can be applied only in some cases Such plants would assure to remove unpleasant substances in mature fruits, that are carefully designed to be eaten and to be as safe as possible. Because different plant species compete for our attention. A plant that keeps putting harmful substances in its fruits is losing the game at middle term. We would just spread more seeds of its tastier competitors instead. Tubers, bulbs or leaves would compete in a different league in that case
  - lathyrus_long 5y ago
    > A plant that keeps putting harmful substances in its fruits is losing the game at middle term. We would just spread more seeds of its tastier competitors instead. Humans indeed find some endogenous pesticides unpleasant; but we enjoy others very much, to the point of addiction. For example, nicotine from tobacco dust was used historically as a pesticide on other plants, and many modern synthetic pesticides are nicotine analogs (neonics). On a milder note, the compounds that give many herbs their flavor are also insecticides--it's easier to grow basil without an aphid problem than lettuce. The question of why we evolved to enjoy those poisons is interesting, with no clear answer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3817850/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3817850/ That said, the original claim makes little sense. Natural pest resistance often arises from higher concentrations of endogenous pesticides, but this would generally just mean something like "stronger-tasting herbs", not any harm. Even if it were harmful, conventional growers prefer varieties with good natural resistance too.
    - pvaldes 5y ago
      I don't think that defensive substances to made the plant unpalatable should be put in the same category as modern pesticides, designed to kill everything by contact (including predators) instead of to deter the plant eaters. Is a totally new level.
      - JamisonM 5y ago
        > ..modern pesticides, designed to kill everything by contact (including predators) instead of to deter the plant eaters.. This is not an accurate statement, obviously modern pesticides are not as targeted as would be optimal but they are most certainly not designed to kill everything by contact. For example I will apply Coragen later in the season when I need Grasshopper control, despite greater expense, because it is much less harmful to bees than more cost-effective options.
JamisonM 5y ago
This is the first time I have heard this endogenous pesticide argument and I gotta say, it seems extraordinary! Is there some solid evidence for this?
- JamisonM 5y ago
  (Also the argument that applied pesticides are on the surface of plants/produce only is incorrect as a blanket statement. There are many systemic insecticides on the market and they are usually preferable due to duration of protection.)
  - TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
    Indeed the article speaks to this: “ In terms of washing, it should remove some residues on the skin of a product (which will often be fungicides used to prevent rotting during storage and transportation). However, many modern [synthetic] pesticides are what are called ‘systemic’ which means that they are absorbed into the plant and distributed throughout its tissues, reaching any fruits or flowers. As a result, pesticide residues are often contained within the body of the produce itself and therefore washing the surface won’t remove them.”

sjtindell 5y ago

I’m interested, can you share some source for this information?

pvaldes 5y ago
Is probably saying that plants accumulate deterring substances against plagues, but this can be applied only in some cases Such plants would assure to remove unpleasant substances in mature fruits, that are carefully designed to be eaten and to be as safe as possible. Because different plant species compete for our attention. A plant that keeps putting harmful substances in its fruits is losing the game at middle term. We would just spread more seeds of its tastier competitors instead. Tubers, bulbs or leaves would compete in a different league in that case
- lathyrus_long 5y ago
  > A plant that keeps putting harmful substances in its fruits is losing the game at middle term. We would just spread more seeds of its tastier competitors instead. Humans indeed find some endogenous pesticides unpleasant; but we enjoy others very much, to the point of addiction. For example, nicotine from tobacco dust was used historically as a pesticide on other plants, and many modern synthetic pesticides are nicotine analogs (neonics). On a milder note, the compounds that give many herbs their flavor are also insecticides--it's easier to grow basil without an aphid problem than lettuce. The question of why we evolved to enjoy those poisons is interesting, with no clear answer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3817850/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3817850/ That said, the original claim makes little sense. Natural pest resistance often arises from higher concentrations of endogenous pesticides, but this would generally just mean something like "stronger-tasting herbs", not any harm. Even if it were harmful, conventional growers prefer varieties with good natural resistance too.
  - pvaldes 5y ago
    I don't think that defensive substances to made the plant unpalatable should be put in the same category as modern pesticides, designed to kill everything by contact (including predators) instead of to deter the plant eaters. Is a totally new level.
    - JamisonM 5y ago
      > ..modern pesticides, designed to kill everything by contact (including predators) instead of to deter the plant eaters.. This is not an accurate statement, obviously modern pesticides are not as targeted as would be optimal but they are most certainly not designed to kill everything by contact. For example I will apply Coragen later in the season when I need Grasshopper control, despite greater expense, because it is much less harmful to bees than more cost-effective options.

JamisonM 5y ago

This is the first time I have heard this endogenous pesticide argument and I gotta say, it seems extraordinary! Is there some solid evidence for this?

JamisonM 5y ago
(Also the argument that applied pesticides are on the surface of plants/produce only is incorrect as a blanket statement. There are many systemic insecticides on the market and they are usually preferable due to duration of protection.)
- TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
  Indeed the article speaks to this: “ In terms of washing, it should remove some residues on the skin of a product (which will often be fungicides used to prevent rotting during storage and transportation). However, many modern [synthetic] pesticides are what are called ‘systemic’ which means that they are absorbed into the plant and distributed throughout its tissues, reaching any fruits or flowers. As a result, pesticide residues are often contained within the body of the produce itself and therefore washing the surface won’t remove them.”